genuine partnership with vietnam shouldn't -- is a relationship that we pursue in and of itself. it's not about -- it's not about china. it's about the united states and vietnam. but i should also note that, you know, we don't have any illusions given our own history with vietnam about the future of that relationship either, you know, there are issues that we have to continue to work at. there are human rights questions that we still have in terms of how vietnam treats some of its own religious minorities that we need to be able to cycle through as well. >> thank you. thank you once again for your patience. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you, mr. kissell. and now someone the subject is near and dear to her heart the gentlelady from hawaii. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i don't believe we can discuss readiness out of the context of what has happened and what the implications of what happened,

the devastation and the catastrophe in japan. having said that, i would like to know -- japan is considered like our anchor partner in terms of our security defenses in the pacific. what impact is the tsunami and the earthquake having on whatever strategic locations we have in japan? mr. secretary, you could answer that. >> certainly. i mean, to begin with, i would say that it would be speculative at best at this point to comment on any of the longer term implications of the earthquake and the tsunami. but i would note that certainly, i think, the assistance that we've been able to offer on the engagement of the u.s. military and the u.s. government across-the-board in response to

this crisis has helped to strengthen the bonds that we have between our -- between our two countries and help make a case, i think, for the logic of why we have a forward-deployed presence in the asian pacific region including the basin footprint that we have in japan. >> i understand that part, mr. secretary. i guess my question is more in line of what role does japan play, if any, in our readiness posture in the pacific? and how is it now going to be affected by what has happened? >> japan is the cornerstone of our approach to the security issues in the asian pacific region and there's a reason why -- why we term it that way and it's not just rhetoric. japan is an incredibly important ally. the questions they bring to the alliance including our basin footprint in japan is absolutely critical to our enduring

presence in the asian pacific region. i have absolutely no reason to believe that anything that has transpired in the past few days following the earthquake and the tsunami will undermine the commitment, the depth, the strength of the u.s./japan alliance. as i noted, i think just to the contrary that we'll emerge from this and japan will emerge from this with a slower and better and deeper relationship. >> one of the issues that we are aware of is the fact that the japanese government structure has changed. we've gone from -- since, i think, 1955 when the liberal democratic party actually had control of their parliament and now we have the democratic party of japan. and i don't believe necessarily that the democratic party of japan felt as strong about our military presence as the liberal democratic party. do you feel that somehow that structure is now going to be affected as well?

>> i would offer that we've been extraordinarily happy to be working with the dpj government over the past years. as i noted in my opening statement, the prime minister, the defense minister, the foreign member, all the senior mailboxes of the dpj government have made strong and forward-leaning statements about the value of alliance and the value of the u.s. military presence? -- in japan and about their commitment to move forward with the realignment roadmap and frf and so we view them as a good and strong partner. >> i understand what you're saying but isn't it true that the reality of it as to the transfer, that japan has yet to come up with approximately their 6 million, 6 billion of the 10 billion price tag and given the disaster, given the catastrophe.

what are the probabilities that they're going to pay for the move of the -- part of the marines to guam? >> well, i mean, again, i think that would be highly speculative. i guess i would note that japan has offered 415.5 million in funding for guam infrastructure improvements in the japan fiscal year 2011 budget. that's already been approved by their lower house. we expect it to be -- to be fully approved and that we're not aware of any effort -- we've not heard any voices in the past few days that would suggest that that -- that that funding is not going to -- is not going to go forward. >> so have you heard an affirmation that even if they've got this critical situation where they're going to be rebuilding a huge part of that nation, that they're still going to continue with the commitments to the united states? >> the discussions that we've been having with the government of japan in the past few days

have been how to respond to the immediate humanitarian crisis and the situation that the fukushima dai-chi nuclear plant. once we have managed to deal with the management of the immediate consequences, the thousands of people that have died, the hundreds of thousands that are internally displaced and the ongoing situation with the nuclear power plant, i'm sure we will have those discussions. i'm fully confident that the government of japan will continue to be positively engaged. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you for your questions. to follow up on what the gentlelady from hawaii was asking, mr. schiffer, you and general alles have both talked about the importance of our allies working in a partnership fashion for us to be able to do the type of defense that we need in the pacific. have there been any thoughts

about perhaps selling some export version of the f-22 to japan or any of our other allies given the fact that we are concerned perhaps that the russians may be selling their pac f-8 to other players around the scomborld if we did that and i'm not suggested that that we do, there's arguments that it would bring the cost of the f-22 down. would there be any discussions there about doing that? >> i think secretary gates is very, very clear in where he is on the f-22 program. i did not bring my copy of the letter resignation on my backpack. [laughter] >> well placed. we don't want you resigning either. >> i won't. i'll leave the f-22 to mr. schiffer. but i just commented -- we have had discussions with the japanese about what their needs are in terms of aviation

requirements. we think the f-35 makes a very logical fit for them. i think it's what they're exploring currently so that makes imminent sense to us in many ways considering, i think, it more adequately -- it more adequately addresses the defense japan needs. and to get back to our allies and partners in the region. in the northeast asia region we're seeing increased levels of cooperation between the government and south korea and japan even this recent tragedy shows a degree of cooperation between them in terms of assistance so we're encouraged by that and by the trilateral cooperation that we're having between the two sides. >> madam secretary, i'm going to let you slide on that question. we're going to go to the gentlelady. >> mr. chairman, if you would bare with me i have a number of questions and i just want to get answers for the record and so if the witnesses could make it very brief. first secretary pfannenstiel, now that the programmic agreement has been signed when

can we expect task orders for contract awardees and when will some initial construction efforts get underway in guam? >> congresswoman, we'll be issuing contracts and noise to proceed on several of these contracts very soon. and we have some that have actually -- contracts have already been awarded and we'll be able to issue awards to proceed. on a number of orders we have a number of them. >> regarding training, i hope general alles can help to answer this. the qdr addresses training in the pacific. general, can you describe the current training in this region and are there any efforts by paycom to lead a comprehensive approach to develop a truly effective solution to training issuing in the future? >> thank you, ma'am. there is an effort on the part

of dacom to start an eis which i think the funding is in the current year's budget that would address wholisticly to address paycom across the pacific region, excuse me there. so i think that addresses partially the issues on guam. we've discussed the sighting of ranges of guam and the need of individual training in terms of small arms and those issues and where the broader degrees of training could be conducted throughout the -- throughout the theater. one of our prime considerations, though, as we have discussed is that we maintain ready forces throughout our region. we think that's critical as a deterrence aspect so it's very important at the combat and commanders level we're able to train our marines, soldiers, airmen across their range of required skills. >> thank you. secretary pfannenstiel, i hope

you can help me better understand the fiery range on guam. i expressed the location for the firing range on guam. the marine requirements seems to have shifted since the beginning of the eis process in 2006. and as such, why are these individual qualifications needed to be met on guam? has a cost benefit analysis -- and i think we talked about this earlier, been conducted to determine why the island may or may not be feasible? >> we have looked at the island and, in fact, we'll be doing some group training there but the individual qualifying needs to be on-site close to where the marines will be. we've looked at the ability to move the marines as it would be required -- to move them to tinian, often to support them there, to move them back.

you end up not just with a lot of additional expense, you reduce the time that they have to train. you reduce the through-put of training for them. given all of that, we've concluded that the training needs to be on the island of guam and we have sought for -- since we have been doing the process to find a place on the island of guam that meets the needs that is sufficient size. that has the least impact on the community. that does not interfere with business or recreation, that is operationally safe, which is why we ended up with a preferred alternative that we're now looking at. >> yes. another question for you, secretary. many institutions of higher learning have cooperative agreements with dod to support the mission and provide technical studies and analysis. are you open to developing a cooperative agreement with the university of game? -- guam.

and what steps are you taking to get an agreement on a cooperative agreement? >> we have the highest respect -- i personally have the highest respect for the university of guam and dr. underwood. i've met with him every time i've gone to guam. i believe that the university is a true asset for the island. i'm not sure what the cooperative agreement is that you'd be proposing but i'm certainly open to talking about it. >> thank you. and another one i have for you, secretary. as you know, concluded in the decision of record was a commitment to adaptive program management throughout the duration of the military buildup. however, there is still a lack of common understanding of apm specific meaning for the buildup. what role do you see apm and cmcc played as the relocation moves forward. >> the adaptive relationship was developed as a way of flowing if necessary the activity of the

buildup to keep from overwhelming the infrastructure of the island, whether it's water or wastewater or power or roads or any other aspect of the infrastructure. so the idea is that as the buildup happens, as construction happens, we'll look continually at the logistics that are needed and flow down and change the schedule. and the cmc, the civilian military coordinating council, would be the oversight body that would meet and decide whether the buildup was, in fact, moving too fast. whether it needed to be slowed down in some aspect. right now we're in the process of working with the other parties who would be involved in this to develop the operating charter for the cmcc. >> a follow-up on this now, if a project related to the buildup is causing significant environment impacts, how will dod adequately adapt given the short time frame for the buildup?

>> i believe it would depend on what the impact of the problem would be. we are working with environmental protection agency and many other resources agencies to mitigate where we could be and to slow down. >> and throughout the course of this series of hears on are we ready, we have discussed the element of risk in the operations and maintenance. now, i'd like to bring an element of serious risk in the acquisition strategy for the military buildup on guam. the current acquisition strategy requires that each contractor provides a certain level of medical care at each work site as well as health insurance coverage. the plan also calls for the prescreening of any guest workers at their origin. the fragmented strategy could result in seven different plans for how to care for workers. given the state of the health care system on guam, i think this part of the plan assumes

way too much risk for our overall health infrastructure so can you detail for the committee why this strategy was settled at? and what steps are being taken to ensure that the predeployment screening of guest workers is done to a certain standard? >> congresswoman, the concern here was to specifically avoid overwhelming the medical facilities available on guam. so it became part of the contracting process that the contractors would have to provide medical care for their workers. that's an important part of what determined whether they would be selected. our expectation is that these workers will be able to be treated by their employers. if they need to go to the hospital for stabilization, they would do that. then they would be airlifted off, that they would be able to

put the least possible impact on the island's existing medical facilities. in terms of screening, before they came, we would have to ensure that that would happen and that it would be effective. >> can i get your word on working with my office further on this detail? >> oh, absolutely. i'm glad to do that. >> very good. and one last question for you, the microdealsian biosecurity plans was developed by various agencies to include the dod and doi to determine the risks of terrestrial and marine invasive species to the region resulting from the buildup. can you tell me how the dod will implement the mbp and what proactive actions the dod will take to prevent new invasive species from being introduced? >> we have a fairly elaborate plan of how it would work and i'd be glad to get that more

information on that to your office. i think that would be more productive than trying to walk through the various species of it here. >> very good because we do have enough brown tree snakes. general alles, at least -- the least is up next year. can you describe the ship repair provides paycom? >> ma'am, i'll have to take that for the record. i'm not in a position to address that one. but i can definitely get you the answer. >> very good. mr. chairman, that concludes. i just wanted the answers to these questions for the record. >> thank you and feel free to supplement anticipate of those answers that you have for the record. just a couple more questions. general, admiral willard, when he was here last year gave some testimony about the number of ships in the chinese navy. do you have any idea how many ships the chinese have in their navy today? >> i can comment on their modernization, the specific numbers i would need to get --

>> if you would just get those numbers to us and supply them to us. and mr. schiffer, today is march 15th. it's 2011. at the point years from now, do you have any idea if we continue on the same building plan we're on right now, how you will the number of sub marines that we have in our navy compare with the number of sub marines the chinese will have based on our projections? >> i'd have to get back to you on the record in terms of the exact number. >> and i understand. if you could get that number back to us so we can see it. the other thing -- general, you and i talked the other day. one of the interesting things -- most of our strategies are dependent upon our forces being able to attack and then move back to sanctuaries where they have safe harbors at that took time. if we had a combat in the pacific those safe harbors would

not be available. and the training in the western pacific and if so, what are the key lessons what we learned from such training? and if not, why are we not training in this manner especially since the chinese military writing cite the battle networks as our achilles heel. >> one of the things we'll continue to work on the need to be able to operate in mission-controlled environments. and that's an important -- that's something certainly we have done in a robust nature in the past. it's an area that we need to address now and in the future. it's an area that's not being ignored. it's not an area that we don't ever practice and as we look at potential countries, it's going to have to look at the kinds of training we are doing and how we prepare for that kind of a situation. >> and if you could keep our subcommittee posted on your progress on that, we would appreciate it. the other thing -- our navy and

air force, are they trained and ready to operate under sustained lost degration based on space capabilities and capacities? because we hope that we see chinese perhaps looking at taking away some of those capabilities. are we training to deal with that degradation as that takes place. >> i think there's more improvement that we can gain in those areas both in the type of technology we're using that provides a more robust space network surfaces resistance and those kinds of things and also from the standpoint of practicing those types of operations in those environments. there's certainly improvement that could be done here i don't want imply that there's not practice at all now. that would be an incorrect statement. >> last i object question and maybe all three of you can take a bite on this on how we can do better. i want to go back to the very first question that i raised and it's the fact that the secretary did direct the air force and the navy to develop a air/sea battle

concept to direct the problem which many people feel is the most acute in the western pacific. we know from writings that this challenge has been emerging really for the better part of the last decade. and yet we have the instruction come out last year to develop the concept and all of your testimonies today were that it was evolving. what takes us so long to create a concept to respond to a threat that we have? any suggestions on how we can cut that timeline down? >> i think that's an excellent question, mr. chairman. and one that i would very much like to be able to take back and consult with some of my colleagues on so that we could provide you with a better answer as to how we might -- might be able to be more nimble in our own -- in our own thinking.

>> and we're not pointing the finger at you. we're pointing at the finger at us too and we want to work in a partnership so that we can respond faster and we would love to have that dialog and any input on how you could make that better. general you've lived this most of your career. any suggestions? >> i think this has come in to a much better focus here over the past few years on the direction that china has gone with this niss ariel denial here and that's what's brought us to action in air and sea battles and numerous areas. >> and general one thing i would just throw out we're not just limiting it to the antidenial or antiaccess denial problem. it is generally when we're trying to deal with these concepts sometimes it just takes us so long to get our arms around it. i know in many hearings that we had and we were talking about this very problem and we'd have

the department of defense telling us it's no problem. it's no problem. it's no problem and then it seems like everybody went to bed one night and woke up the next morning and said, oh, my gosh it's a problem. and so we would just appreciate any insight you would have in your years of experience in how we can make that better. madam secretary, i know not on this issue but on a lot of the other issues across agencies, you've lived with this a long time, too. what are your suggestions with how we cope with it a little bit faster? >> mr. chairman, i'm not sure that i have any wisdom beyond what my colleagues here have offered. i am, as you note, relatively new to the pentagon and the processes. i see dedication. i see very knowledgeable people who are answering questions as well as they can. and i believe that the interaction with congress is strong and is positive.

clearly, if i have any ideas on this, i will share -- i'd be glad to share them with you. >> we're about out of time. i just want to give our witnesses any couple minutes that you need something we've left out that you think was important or you got shortchanged on that you didn't get to get on the record. mr. schiffer? >> no, mr. chairman. i think weave had ample opportunity and thank you very much for this chance to come up and engage in this important dialog with you. >> thank you, mr. schiffer. general? >> i would just mention what we kind of discussed in your office which is we look at this issue of antiaccess ariel denial we're in kind of in support of congress in working on these particular problems i think will be essential to addressing the issue. >> okay. thank you. madam secretary? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i would like to thank you and congresswoman for the opportunity to come and talk about what i see is a very important part of our pacific posture and i know that guam is one piece of it but i think for

many of us it is a key strategic piece so thank you -- >> our doors remain open to all three of you, anything that we can do to help. i'd like to leave with the closing comments. >> just a few seconds, mr. chairman. i want to thank you very much on focusing on -- this is a very important move for the military, probably one of the biggest in the history, i understand. it's going to cost our government and the government of japan $16 billion when all is concluded and i want to thank you very much on focusing on the asia pacific area and its importance. >> with that we're adjourned. thank you all very much. [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations]

>> ismael reed is on in-depth live sunday april 3rd on booktv. he's written over 25 books including airing dirt laundry, another day at the front and obama and the jim crow media. join our three-hour conversations taking your phone calls and tweets for issue meal reed sunday april 3rd noon on

eastern. and now to london to prime minister's prime time. every wednesday when parliament is in session prime minister david cameron takes questions from the members of the questions. the house is wrapping up other business. this is live coverage on c-span c-span2. .. for the number of new jobs that will be created as a result of

the expectation program? >> i am very much hoping the elector of vacation of the rail line from this government and announced with full funding by this government will bring much needed in with investors into wales and the jobs we need whales. >> questions for the prime minister? >> number one, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. speaker. the house wishes to join me in a a a tribute to lance corporal steven mckey of the irish regiment who died last wednesday. he was a highly respected, selfless and committed soldiers who will be sorely missed by all those who served with him. deepest of the with his family and friends. across september military repatriation will no longer pass through the town. the house wishes to join me in paying tribute to the people,

and dignified demonstrations have shown between the public and our armed forces. mr. speaker it has been 100 years since the town was conferred with the title of royalty but i can today confirm to the house that her majesty the queen has agreed to confer the thai royal on the town as an enduring symbol of the nation's admiration and our gratitude to the people of that town. the town will roll later this year in a move i believe will be welcomed across our country. i have meetings with minnesota colleagues and others and did addition i will have other meetings later today. >> that say to the house with the prime minister, family and service men. the previous government, the

overseas victimless, and victims to oversee compensation. >> this is something we are looking at. high remember the debate that took place at the time of the bomb and all members who spoke about this and we are bringing forward our proposals shortly. >> the prime minister is to be commended with his leadership in trying to achieve a no-fly zone but it is unlikely that that can be implemented in time to present the final onslaught in libya. would the prime minister agree the best response to this urgent crisis would be for the international community with the support of the arab league to invite the egyptians to urge the egyptian government to send a brigade of its armies as a peacekeeping force into eastern libya to protect its in its tracks and to prevent a

humanitarian disaster? >> my friend speaks with great expertise on these issues and the point about the arms embargo on monday were extremely important. we look at any suggestion. the problem at the moment is there isn't a peace to keep but yesterday evening after extensive discussion with lebanon, france and others the u.k. did table a new security channels resolution including a new flies down, as banning all but humanitarian flights and extension of the travel plans and the asset freeze and tougher enforcement of the arms embargo particularly on the libyan government. there are a wide range of views in the un but i urge those to take the right steps to show some leadership on this issue and make sure we can get rid of this regime. >> can i start by delaying the prime minister's tribute to

stephen mckey from the irish regiment who showed exceptional courage and bravery and with his family and friends, i also want to join the prime minister in his reports on the community and the very fitting board from the royal designation. it is a tribute the way that community has responded to our armed forces. >> following the liberal democrat conference, the prominence of planning a new amendment has helped us. let's be clear. these reforms are about cutting bureaucracy and improving. these reforms were drawn up to approve the any chess and answer questions, answer very quickly, we have already made some real strengthening -- first of all we have ruled out price competition in the any chess and also the

issue raised by the liberal democrats that i completely agree with which is we must avoid cherry picking by the private sector in the any test. he might care to reflect, the private sector was given two fifty million pounds, they were never carried out. and finally got those anti cherry picking amendments. let's remember another go at answering the question, the question i asked following the liberal democrat conference of the weekend, are any amendments tabled to the health bill. the problem with prescriptive questions, it doesn't give you -- to respond to the first

answer. what price competition and cherry picking. what i would say to the hon. gentleman is he should not set his face against reform against the nhl as. we support extra money, what he doesn't support. with an aging population with more drugs coming onstream, what was being provided. >> he never gets away from prescriptive answers. i tell him nobody trusts what he says about the and a chess. and talk about reorganization. there will be no more pointless

reorganization, instead bring chaos. it is profoundly demoralizing. i agree with what the prime minister used to say. and the bureaucracy of the nhl as. we are abolishing the bureaucracy -- he would like to listen to the adviser to the last labor government said about our quote. he said most of these reforms are very much where the last government, one 0 have gone if we were not encountering the roadblocks. we know the roadblock was the last neighbor of the labor party and the current leader is son of roadblock. >> i am proud of the record on the any chess. hundred new hospitals and doctors and nurses than ever before.

the shortest waiting time in history. the highest level of patient satisfaction effort but he is wrecking our record on dna chess. it was a bill that creates a free market free-for-all with existing and h s services. very specific questions. this bill makes health-care subject to competition law for the first time in history. it is beginning to sound like the last leader of the labor party. if you don't listen to the adviser, listening to the spokesman, no one in the house of commons knows more -- >> the answers in the prime minister, order must be heard and that is all there is tuned.

>> if i can take the trouble to read out the opposition speeches, what we talk about. no one in the house of commons knows more about the any chessman andrew lands be. except stephen durrell. with six years, and the nhl. he won the to say these plans are consistent, and i expect no less from andrew lance day. >> talk about prescriptive dances again. why doesn't the answer the question. the sea even though whether the health service will be subject to eu competition or it will be? look at this bill. chapter ii of the bill,

competition. clause 66 by the competition commission. clause 68, with the office of fair trading. can the prime minister explain what at has to do with health care? of the party opposite is the party that wrecked a system. the point i make is deeper and what is still that the manifesto of the last election, i am answering the question. this is what they say. patients requiring care, the lot to choose from any provider who meets n.h. standards. and commander festival. all that changed is they are jumping on every bandwagon, blocking every reform and opposing extra money.

>> he doesn't get it. he is threatening the fabric of the nhl as. everything people don't like about this government, and ignoring everyone who knows something about the health service. and the liberal democrats on saturday, can't trust them. ox isn't it typical that just as he backed the trade union, he comes here with the press

release. >> thank you, mr. speaker. order! order! the client! this is bad for your health. >> has the prime minister read comments made by the laird -- labor chairman. where he said over the last ten years productivity has been in continuous decline. that is -- the taxpayer is getting less for each pound spent. will the prime minister assure this house that that trend is going to be reversed? >> my friend makes an excellent point. members opposite would listen to the labor dominated public accounts and the labor leader. what she said was this. over the last ten years the productivity of any chess hospitals has been in almost

continuous decline. the service has approved of the result of increased spending by the taxpayer has been getting less for each send. that is what we have to look at. the fact is we are not even getting the european average on terms of outcomes. you are twice as likely to die of a heart attack here as in france. you have an aging population and their answer is absolutely nothing. how utterly feeble. >> today's statistics show unemployment has gone down in scotland and up in the rest of the u.k.. will the prime minister ensure the trend of lower unemployment in scotland is not endangered by ridiculously high fuel prices and ridiculously high -- what is still the largest oil-producing nation in the european union. i thank the hon. gentleman. >> clearly today's figures are a mixed picture of the youth unemployment figures which are

disappointed once again but overall what is interesting is employment is up and the number of claimantss nationwide is down and the number of claimantss is down by 32,000 since last year so there are as i say very mixed picture. in terms of your duty, a budget coming up. i don't want to speculate what is going to be in that budget but i know the pain of families and small businesses feeling from huge numbers of increases that were put through by the last government in their last budget. they put through seven fuel increases. one before the election and six afterwards. what a surprise. they didn't even raise that one today. >> hundreds of residents are up in arms at the prospect of having travelers signed imposed on their villages. can the prime minister tell me what can be done and when to remove the top down targets

currently imposed on local authorities? >> i can tell my friend we are abolishing top-down travel targets that were imposed on local authorities and instead local calls wills will determine the right side provisions in consultation with their local community. we recognize that one was apply to everyone in terms of planning in this country travelers included. >> mr. speaker, above average numbers of residential homes for disabled people including hundreds of my constituents. i ask the prime minister why he still plans to scrap the mobility compounded in his welfare reform bill. and will he not compare them with patients in hospitals? they are in their own homes and they are not ill. >> look carefully at the bill and our plans because actually what you will see is in the

reform as we change that benefits and improve that benefit putting the question of mobility in to the reform what we will do is avoid the double canting that happened in the past. >> thank you very much. earlier in the week my friend the prime minister receive representation in relation to the government's production pattern. on the one hand the creditmaking agency and on the other the gentleman who is the leader of opposition and others from the previous administration got us into this mess. >> we should listen to the advice of the credit rating agency who this week reconfirmed our aaa credit rating statement. i also think we should listen to those who are giving a presentation about the british economy, who support deficit reduction and the point i would make is to those people who think there's a difference between deficit reduction and growth at the same time they should look at the interest

rates currently existing in ireland and farr and portugal. in portugal market interest rates are 7-1/2% and what is the plan? to harm the deficit in four years which would get us in four years to where portugal is today. what a brilliant plan. >> thank you very much. and the prime minister, another 750 people up and down the country. and great defensive duties. 1,000 people could be affected by this. all he talked to, to see whether or not a solution could be found because this is serious. >> thank you for raising this point. hi want you to contact the hon.

gentleman to discuss this. it is important that there be competition and choice for the provision. i make sure my ministers get in touch right away. >> can the prime minister tell me, if the dictator is -- for the libyan people against the wishes of the arab league. the community feels it crushing the spirit and hope and life of the libyan people. >> an important point. every world leaders as gaddafi should go and his regime is illegitimate and at the end field left in place that will send a terrible message, not just to people and libya but across the region. and greater openness in the societies which is why it is

right for britain to pave a leading role at the un and elsewhere. i'm not arguing in no-fly zone is a simple solution. of course it isn't but it is part of one of the steps we need to isolate and pressurized this regime and we want to have greater democracy and freedom. >> does the prime minister have any sense, trying to find a peace officer. >> i support the british police. they are the finest in the world. the police as other public servants know is there left to be it -- the budget deficit we have to deal with and if we want to keep police officers on the street to have a pay freeze if, and it is necessary to look and

to work out how to have well-paid or well motivated police officers doing a great job. but it is the opposite. to stand against every reform and change and every improvement and there's nothing we can do about any of these problems. they will not only be relevant but the british public will work out that they are irrelevant. >> last night there was a violent double-murder in subtle and this was the most serious in a series of incidents in the area. will the prime minister reassure me and residents that these crimes will be fully investigated, perpetrators face justice and everywhere in this country must be subject to the rule of law. >> i can give my hon. friend that assurance. this is a disturbing case and i'm sure all would have heard about it this morning on the

news and the police will do everything they can to get to the bottom of this dreadful crime and bring the perpetrators to justice. >> i will say to the house we appreciate the moment of crisis. our hearts go to the people of the area. we appreciate the comments on monday. the prime minister will investigate a british rescue team that recently turned away from japan. >> i can tell the house what happened. the official rescue team that was sent from the u.k. arrived in good time and already started work. there was an extra independent rescue team that did not have the correct documentation so they encountered problems. we are doing everything we can to get access. >> tickets for the london

olympics went on sale. would my friend agree with me that those people buying tickets finish crossing the finish line in first place only to end up on the bronze medal. doesn't he agrees this is an example of the courtesy what we need to know about both? >> i say to the hon. president, genius way of weaving a vote in to a question. clearly the support for the campaign on all sides of the house and there are those who support the other campaign and we should have this argument in the country and make arguments like that but in terms of the olympics i hope as many people as possible will get to see the olympics. fantastic festival in our country. >> the prime minister last year said he wanted a new military -- the law of the land. the british legion said the

proposal put forward from the armed forces bill, do not honor this pledge. will the prime minister follow the meeting's advice to find the law and keep the profit he makes? >> i have discussions about this but it seems to be the right thing to do. clear reference to, and in law but to have a debate in this house every year about the covenant and make sure we can update and improve it because this is not a static document. it needs to take into account changing health needs and education needs and make sure the covenant is the best it can be for our armed service personnel. >> with my right hon. friend supporting the following statements. the reason i never supported a.d. is it would have given labor and even bigger majority in 1997 than it gave the tories a bigger majority in 1983, 1987 as well. if we want reforms to go public

in politics, it doesn't deliver that. would you be surprised to learn that the hon. member of egg setter who is the director of labor -- [yelling] >> what can i add to that judgment? >> i draw attention to the house that i previously declared. there are very few people outside the house or inside the house who thinks the northern rock would have gotten into a much of -- as much trouble from unusual building society. given the skepticism about whether the coalition wants to change the culture in the industry will the prime minister now insist the city at minister require a serious and detailed assessment of the case for

review jewel as asian of northern iraq. >> we are prepared to look at all options and a city minister will be doing that. we think mutual as asian should be going much further than the banking industry and we are looking at options for mutual is asian within the public sector to give public organizations more control over the organizations they are in. in terms of banking is not just mutual, but the issue of responsibility and try to link the idea of taking deposits and making loans in the way building societies used to. >> given the lockerbie bombing and continuing murder of those people does the prime minister's think it was wrong to assign fields to libya for the last government to participate those contracts and will they learn the lessons to insure it never happens again? >> there are lessons to be learned. it was right to respond to what

libya did in terms of weapons of mass destruction but the way in which their response was handled was not right. there was too much credulity shown particularly on issues like the man who was convicted of the biggest mass murder in british history and universities ask themselves some searching questions about what they did. >> the nobel prize-winning economist paul krugman said the government's economic policy is going wrong direction. and a reincarnation of herbert hoover whose policies -- and to leave open to our leaders to be a new group to lead the way. >> as far as a job application went, that was at the greasy end of the spectrum. that is what i would say. i prefer to listen to the end of the o a cd who is dealing with the deficit, the best way to

prepare the ground for growth in the future and when it comes to who supports this policy we have the r m f, d f f b, the cd-i, bank of england, who supports your economic policy? there was a long pause and he replied the guardian. you can keep your supporters. >> people in a wooden bassett have sung no thanks or praise for the occasions over the years but they will be deeply honored and pleased by the great honor shown on this occasion. will the prime minister lead the people in filling the places they felt? >> i say to my hon. friends what an honor it is about background and how i enjoyed meeting with him and others to do that time

and let me be clear. they did not ask for any recognition. they did not -- they believed they were honorably and honestly doing a job that the whole country wanted to see done. now that the route is going different route we have to look at the issues he raiseds. quoted demonstration takes place of solidarity and support but i will bear in mind what he says. >> holding referendum, what was proposed, the wind. really confirm all of the formula by the independent commission, anyone doubting the way it is funded. >> we are looking at such a process. we think it is right and we will bring forward some announcements and proposals by that. because the spending reduction

in whales are less than the spending reductions in england will be fined at the end of this is the difference in spending will be even greater than it is today. i don't expect the contention that people in wales are targeted with cuts and they're getting a better deal than other parts of the united kingdom. >> a report published today by the search charles property campaign shows when labor left off they left 30% of children living in poverty. the worst in england. does the prime minister agree that such a complex problem demands to tackle the causes of poverty and deliver greater social mobility? >> the gentleman is right. if we just think of combating child poverty in terms of moving people a little bit above or below the line we will never deal with the underlying cause of child poverty which is the family breakdown and other problems linked to and i am

determined we tried to get expertise across the house and the hon. member nottingham is involved in this work as is making sure we look at life chances involved in property itself. >> earlier this month i joined my constituents and many others to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of the disaster which was the worst civilian disaster in the world war. 173 people were killed and 90 injured seeking shelter. does the prime minister agree with me that there should be a fitting permanent memorial and will he let his support to the stairway to heaven memorial campaign? .forty-four

>> and also we're not in a similar seismically important and significant area. but nevertheless, i'm sure there will be lessons to learn and that's why my right honorable friend the climate change and energy secretary has asked the head of nuclear inspections and safety to learn the lessons and make sure we do that in our country. >> mr. speaker, this week marks the 70th anniversary of the blitz people lost and 35,000 people were made homeless. they suffered the worst

devastation in life in scotland during the second world war. will the prime minister join me in paying tribute to all those who lost their lives, all those who carries the scares with him today after those terrible events years ago. >> i will certainly join her in paying tribute to those people and i think it's important as we reach the 60th and 70th anniversaries of these events and we recognize there are many people now who lived through them, who are coming to the ends of their lives. it may be our last opportunity to commemorate what happened and remember those who died and i think this is particularly important as we come up to these anniversaries we get that right. >> order. here on c-span, we'll leave the british house of commons as they move on to other legislative business. you've been watching prime minister question time aired live wednesdays at 7:00 am eastern while parliament is in the session. you can see this week's question time sunday night at 9 eastern and pacific on c-span.

and for more information, go to c-span.org and click on c-span series for prime minister questions plus, links to international news media and legislators around the world. you can watch recent video programs dealing with other international issues. >> now, highlights from the most recent question time from the australian parliament. prime minister julia give lard and cabinet members answer questions on the government's plan for a carbon tax and australia's multiculturam culti. >> i'm going to bring you some highlights to the latest australiian parliament. the government has renewed its commitments on climate change announcing fresh plans to put a price on carbon starting with a carbon tax from next year then transitioning to an emissions

trading scheme. the conservative opposition, though, is opposed warning this will drive up costs and lose jobs. after some criticism from the german and british leaders the australiian government argues that multiculturam in this country is working. mist reports of muslims intergrateing in australian society. ♪ >> members. thank you very much, my question. my question is for the member of the climate change. i referred the members up to $13 million of potential credits have been invalidated because they have been installed by

improperly accredited installers all because of failure of the panels involved. will the minister institute an independent investigation and what will the minister do to address this government's chronic incompetence and failure to deliver basic government services. >> here, here. the minister for climate change. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker and i think the members for the question because it provides an opportunity to correct the record in relation to this particular issue. in fact, mr. speaker, since the renewable energy target was initiated, in 2001 by the howard government, over 100 million renewable certificates have been created. and as the regulator because indicating at senate estimates this week. since 2001, 3.5 million renewable energy certificates have not been validated, excuse me, by the regulator.

and i'm advised that some of the reasons for this were largest of wrecks in the system, others have been from the failure to submit the necessary documentation but the regular has also indicated that none have been dealt with in this manner due to safety issues emerging. i'm advised that the enewliable certificate are often resubmitted with the proper document days and are invalidated. the office of the renewable energy regulator checks each batch of wrecks to ensure that they are complied with and the regulators also been given new enforcement powers by this government through the amendments of the legislation in june to maintain a robust compliance system. now, mr. speaker there's nothing new i'm advised in the level of wrecks that are filed in the order protest that warrant a special review of this scheme. and mr. speaker, validly in this respect, in fact, almost a

million of the renewable energy certificates have been invalidated were done so in 2003 during the term of the howard government without any specific review of what had happened. mr. speaker, the legislation is already subject to biennial reviews the first which is due in 2012. and what we are seeing here yet again is an effort by the opposition to misrepresent facts to create a scare campaign, and they do not do their detailed policy work. >> the leader of the opposition. >> mr. speaker, my question is to the prime minister and i refer to to a visit i made today to arthur and rita clack at their fruit and vegetable shop in quinnby on a $6,000 a month power bill will increase by $1500 and that's the start under

the government's carbon tax. >> order. >> and i ask the prime minister, why won't -- why won't the prime minister be honest with the australiian people about the impact of her carbon tax on the cost of food? >> the prime minister. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i thank the leader of the opposition for his question. and as the leader of the opposition, even in the words of his question he's continuing his campaign of misleading and generating fear among the australian community and it's the leader of the opposition today which to hang out at a fruit and vegetable shop and say to the owners of that shop the words he said to the parliament today, he has done them a great service. he has told them nontruths. he has told them something he knew not to be truth at the time

he said it and he did it for no other purpose than to further his smear campaign. it is not right, mr. speaker. it is not right to go around saying things that are untrue in order to generate fear in the australian community. that is what the leader of the opposition is doing. let me say to the leader of the opposition, what we said on this side is giving businesses like -- >> order. >> that you went to today certainty. giving them certainty so they know as they make the arrangements for their business, what arrangements actually applies so that they can do their business plans with certainty. now, it seems to me a little bit interesting, mr. speaker, that at one point the leader of the opposition actually thought certainty was important for businesses. at one point he was wandering

saying things on the 19th of july i think business deserves certainty. on the 19th of july, i think what business needs is a period of certainty and stability. what the shadow treasurer said on the 21st of july, we now accept the australian people want certainty and stability. but now, of course, the leader of the opposition promising australian businesses well, he said it on morning tv today. where he was asked the question, big business is obviously a little concerned, a little confused. where does it leave them in all this and what the leader of the opposition said is well completely up in the air and with no certainty. with those words, the leader of the opposition -- >> order! >> has named his own campaign, create fear, try and stop a competent nation, dealing with the challenges of the future. and if his fear campaign fails and we price carbon on the first

of july 2012 as i intend to do, then he will go to the next election with a plan to wreck the australian economy with economic vandalism. >> order! >> and for the certainty that they need. the nation's reputation in international markets. i plan to render to voice important decisions that australian businesses have made. i will see electricity prices to rise and rise and rise because there is no certainty in investment in electricity. the house will come to order. >> and at the hands of households, the households assistance we have given them to make sure that hard-working australians have less money in their purses and their wallets than they've had before.

>> my question is representing the minister for climate change and efficiency senator huang. did the minister outline to the senate the benefits to the australian economy of putting a price on carbon? in particular, what certainty this carbon price may give businesses around future investment decisions. >> order! [inaudible conversations] >> when the interjections across the chamber cease, we will proceed. the minister representing the minister for climate change and energy efficiency, senator huang. >> thank you, mr. president. i thank senator hurley for that question which recognizes that this is an economic reform.

mr. president, this is a major economic reform. a major economic reform that would transform our economy and it's a major economic reform that those opposite are simply not up to. simply not up to. and this is -- it is a reform -- it is reform that will transform our economy and because of the economic reform we know on this side of the chamber that what we have to provide certainty to visitors, certainty to businesses so they make the investments necessary for the transformation of the economy. what the opposition appears to have forgotten is that business investment is not only made for one year. they are made for many years. businesses need to be thinking about thinking of the next five years and ten years. businesses better able to plan for the future decisions. certainty around a price on

carbon is fundamental for the better planning so that they have preparations for these future decisions. mr. him mr. president, we do face a choice do we want to shape the future or do we simply want to have the future imposed upon us? because on this side of the table, we have labour senators who are prepared to look to the future, prepared to reform for the future. a party that is prepared to build today for tomorrow. what we are faced with is a party of records. nothing but a party of records. that's by a man who knows how to brawl. a man who knows how to brawl. a man who knows how to destroy and a man of incapable of leadership. and incapable -- >> your time has expired. senator wong? senator hurley. >> thank you, mr. president.

i have a supplementary question. can the minister answer why the carbon prize is likely to have beneficial flow and effects to other areas of the economy? and to members of the community? [inaudible conversations] >> those who wish to debate this issue can do so at the end of question time. the minister? >> thank you, mr. president. and i thank the senator for her question and it goes to the issue to the extent to which where the risk of uncertainty causes a swollen effect in the economy. it's interesting, mr. president, to know that the party opposite used to be a party that understood the importance of

utilizing market mechanism. now it's a party that doesn't understand the importance of business certainty and prepared to rip that away with their irresponsible pledge yesterday delivered by the chief record mr. abbott and to remove a price on carbon if they were ever, ever to return to this side of the chamber. a part of us used to understand, mr. president, the importance of businesses that used to understand -- that used to understand the importance of market mechanisms. >> time's expired. time has expired, senator wong. can she outline any alternative approaches to putting a price on carbon and what risks these alternative proposals may epgender? -- engender?

>> wait a minute. when there is silence -- the minister. >> mr. president, really there are no real alternatives from that side. the only alternative is more risk, more uncertainty, more fluxing. they brought an action on climate change, they brought a no to reform but they do not how to do it. perhaps they should take some heed of what what was said in recent times and on the record as saying first their policy to deliver fossil reductions is a recipe for fiscal recklessly. and it's a recipe for fiscal recklessness. but we also -- >> senator wong just resume your seat.

when there's silence -- when there's silence, we'll proceed. senator wong. >> we also had recent revelations suggested in the media that it was prepared -- for him it would support the carbon prize if that was reform in the last election. what an indication of the political -- >> time has expired. >> mr. speaker, my question is to the prime minister. i refer the prime minister to john frangolips who who has already paying $3,000 a month for electricity to keep his small business going. how much will his power costs rise? >> order. >> under the prime minister's carbon tax and if her answer is that she hasn't announced the details yet, what can be more uncertain than a tax she can't explain? >> order!

the prime minister has the call. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i thank the leader of the opposition for his question. and what i would commend to the leader of the opposition is the words of the members for groom who was very frank of the electricity prices and his words still ring true today. what he said is the enormous investment needed across australia to expand electricity surprise, will double prices in the next 5 to 7 years regards of who wins the -- >> order, order. prime minister, prime minister. order! order. the leader of the opposition for the point of order. >> yes, on direct relevance how much more will prices rise because of the prime minister's

carbon's tax? [inaudible conversations] >> order! >> there are a number of parts to the question. i'll listen carefully to the prime minister's response. she understands what needs to be relevant. the prime minister has the call. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. the members went on to say the lack of planning has led to an investment drought. what that means and what the leader of the opposition ought to acknowledge is that we are in a situation where electricity prices are rising, where there's been insufficient investment in the sector and in part that insufficient investment has occurred because of uncertainty about a carbon price. and so for the small business person, that the leadership of the opposition refers to, there are basically two futures.

one of rising electricity prices with no action on carbon pollution, no investment certainty because there is no carbon price and i continued lack of investment electricity generation and distribution with all of the stresses and strains that implies for prices. or the alternate future, the future that the government would advocate for and which we announced when we announced the carbon pricing mechanism last week. we fix a price for carbon. there is certainty for those who would invest that will enable investment in energy in renewable energy, in electricity generation. >> order. >> that will advance capacity. that is important for small businesses, for big businesses and for households. and because we are a labour government, there is fear and

generation assistance to households. those are the two alternatives, mr. speaker. and to be clear on the alternatives, i think the leader of the opposition should acknowledge that his alternative is one where he takes $20 billion of taxpayers money, uses it to buy international credits because it's the only way he can reach the bipartisan targets for carbon pollution reduction. then, of course, he spends $10.5 billion on ineffective direct action measures, a total of $30 billion spent in all. an additional tax burden of $720 per year for australian families. what the leadership of the oops stands for is imposing that $720 additional whilst electricity prices rise, while households go without compensation. >> order! >> well, mr. speaker, we stand

for a different future pricing carbon, certainty in investment, fair and generous assistance to households. that is what our game is all about. i say to the leader of the opposition, it's time to put the politics aside and do something in the national interest. that's what we intend to do. >> the member will withdraw. >> i withdraw, mr. speaker. >> the leader of the opposition. >> mr. speaker, my questions to the prime minister and i refer the prime minister to her repeated promise before the last election including on the very day before the election i rule out a carbon tax. how can she justify -- >> order! >> how can she justify -- >> the leader of the opposition

will resume. [laughter] >> order, order. the house will come to order. i've tolerated but not encouraged the use of props by the questioner and others. that sort of display is outside the standing orders and unruly. the leader of the opposition has the call. >> well, thank you, mr. speaker and my question is to the prime minister and i repeat it. given her repeated promises prior to the election, i rule out a carbon tax. how can she possibly justify today's betrayal?

and if the australian people couldn't trust her on this how could they trust her on anything. >> the honorable member's time has expired. the prime minister. thank you very much, mr. speaker. and i thank the leader of the opposition for his question because what the leader of the opposition may have noticed following the last election is that the australian people have voted for change. they voted for a carbon prize. and this parliament has had the opportunity -- this parliament gives us the opportunity to price carbon -- member! >> and mr. speaker, let me just explain this to the leader of the opposition. >> bluntly without the leader of the opposition's characteristic bends and flows. the characteristic use of words that we associate with the leader of the opposition when we seek to destroy and wreck and spin and mislead.

let's be really clear about what we need to achieve here. climate change is real. i believe that. i believe that it's caused by human activity. we need to act on climate change and have an economy for the future. we need to do that because other parts of the world are acting. it is not in our interest to be left behind. we are a confident people. we are a people who have achieved change before and we will achieve it again. and mr. speaker, in achieving that change, we will make sure that we act fairly and have a fair carbon price. the carbon pricing mechanism that i've announced today arising from the discussions of the multiparty climate change committee is a common price mechanism that would start -- >> the member will -- >> it's a game that would start

with a fixed period effectively like a tax. it would move to a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme following that fixed prize period of 3 to 5 years. the carbon prize would exclude agriculture so we would have our farmers able to participate in initiatives like our carbon price initiative. we will have a carbon prize in meeting our initiatives. because we are a labour government, we will make sure that we act fairly towards australians and they are treated fairly as they adjust to carbon pricing. mr. speaker, now is the right time to act. the right time to modernize our economy into a low pollution, clean economy of the future. what australians expect from the people is that they will work

together for positive change. >> order. >> i believe the vast majority of people in this parliament came to this place wanting to be associated with changes that are positive for australia and will make a difference to our future prosperity and future opportunity. the leader of the opposition came to this place hoping to make his name on what he can wreck, stop and destroy. where we will continue working through the multiparty climate change committee to price carbon. it's the right thing to do by australian prosperity. by australian jobs, by a clean energy future, by doing the right thing on climate change, we will keep working to price climate change and treat australians fairly. >> the